Voluntarily emoving prior dergatory reporting with one CRA is not basis for requring removal from all others.
The two statutory requirements regarding reporting are that (1) any reporting cannot be knowingly inaccurate, and (2) prior reporting must be timely updated to maintain its accuracy.
However, if you file a dispute with one CRA, and the disputed information cannot be verified, it is not sufficient that they delete with only the CRA through which you filed the dispute. They are required to also report the results of the dispute to all CRAs to which the information has been reported. Thus, separate disputes with each CRA re not necessary. That, of course, does not apply to GW deletions.
Subjective deletion with one CRA does not alter the fact of the actual delinquency having occured, and thus does not make the continued reporting to the others inaccurate.
If anything, the subjective deletion with one CRA could be argued as not maintaining the current accuracy of their reporting with that CRA, which is certainly not an argument that would be in your interest.
Why they would only delete with one CRA and not the others is hard to say. It may have been only a business decision to limit the number of possible future disputes by removing reporting from all but one, or it may be a desire to reduce their future necessity to update with multiple CRAs should any prior reporting later require update.
